Skip to main content

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 5, 2013 7:19pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Propaganda?

I had an opportunity to go into the local community health center tonight and I was struck by the wording of this (MCHC_prop.jpg) sign, and many others like it. Now one could argue that Affordable Healthcare Act is many more letters (for the printers sake at least), but are they not promoting a political position/party instead of a government benefit?

They had a neat maze though (MCHC_maze.jpg).

Attachment: MCHC_prop.jpg
Attachment: MCHC_maze.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 6, 2013 12:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Yeah, it makes me cringe, too. But on the other hand, the Right tagged it as Obamacare (even though it's really just Romneycare Revisited) and repeated the word ad nauseum. So if it's known as Obamacare, then why not let people know exactly what they're signing up for -- e.g., the dreaded so-called Obamacare?

There have been surveys showing that if people are asked about the Affordable Healthcare Act and whether they like it and are shown the info, they'll say "yeah we love it," but when they're asked next about Obamacare, they'll say "NOOO we HATE it!" The use of the word "Obamacare" by the Right has been very effective in framing the argument.

I'd prefer the real name with "Obamacare" somewhere in quotes, for information purposes. Actually I'd prefer it by a long shot. But at any rate, it's not propaganda, which is defined by ever-helpful Wikipedia as "a form of communication aimed towards influencing the attitude of the community toward some cause or position by presenting only one side of an argument. Propaganda statements may be partly false and partly true. Propaganda is usually repeated and dispersed over a wide variety of media in order to create the chosen result in audience attitudes."

That's the right-wing media's take on Obamacare for sure. And I'm not making a policy judgment: Whether you think "Obamacare" is a good idea or a terrible one or in between, the use of the term "Obamacare" is absolutely intended as anti-Obama and anti-Affordable Care Act propaganda, and is deployed by people who do not ever intend to give both sides. (The Left does the same thing, but generally less effectively. I'd have to go back to Reagan's "Star Wars" to think of a proposal that the Left renamed effectively in a way that framed the argument.)

So putting the right-wing anti-Obama propaganda term on a sign used for a different purpose in a government office ... well, it's weird, but it's definitely not propaganda, because it doesn't fit the definition. (In fact, it's arguably balancing the propaganda.)

I'd guess that whoever created the sign did see it as fighting back against the Other Side by taking the word and coopting/reclaiming it (as "queer" has been) ... and yeah, of course that's a position ... but that's just a guess as to what was in the sign-maker's mind. It doesn't say "Obamacare is Great!" Basically, as I see it, it's just giving some information that wouldn't be available, albeit in a clunky and odd way (since "Obamacare" would be better in quotes). And it's sure a sign of both the impact of the right-wing media on the dialogue and, perhaps, the dumbing down and LCD'ing of America ... after all, it's a darn government office sign, and "Obamacare" is just tossed out there as if that's the real name. Sheesh.




This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2013-11-06 08:55:17

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Nov 6, 2013 8:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Right - Left, blah, blah, blah.

SCOTUS, namely Justice Roberts (correctly IMO) deemed it Constitutional as a tax and within the auspices of Congressional authority to devise and implement citing Article I, Section 8.

His stroke of genius was deeming it unconstitutional under the defenses' claim that it was under Congress' authority using the Commerce Clause of the same Article.

Obama witheld his vote in support of Roberts' nomination and appointment to SCOTUS because Roberts and Obama had clashed in the past and during his (Roberts') interview hearings over the range and scope of Congressional authority to implement programs (like AHA/ACA) using the Commerce Clause. Not surprisingly, Obama felt Congress should have unlimited power, Justice Roberts disagreed.

By determining that ACA was/is Constitutional under the taxing authority of COngress, but unconstitutional using the Commerce Clause, Roberts in one fell swoop neutered future Congresses from using the Commerce Clause as justification for mandated programs. SCOTUS precedent is all but impossible to reverse.

Roberts clearly (to me anyway) was willing to lose a battle in order to win the war. In siding with the more liberal side of the court, Roberts essentially pimp slapped Obama and future Congresses into a box that severely limited their future authority. Obama's worst fears about Roberts' appointment came to pass.

I have a couple of rules I try to follow every day:

- Never piss off a Federal Judge who may one day be appointed to the Supreme Court.

- Don't run with cherry tomatoes in your mouth.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 6, 2013 9:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Nailed it - and I thought elections didn't matter...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Monte B Cowboy Date: Nov 6, 2013 11:21am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Maybe it's a Wall Street conspiracy because Obama's secret new trade pact, TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership), is NAFTA on steroids?

Was Sen Obama was betting (back then) that Stevens would strike down TPP (in the near future), and that's why he pissed off Stevens while he was Senator?

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/4/a_corporate_trojan_horse_obama_pushes

Maybe Obamacare is needed now because consumer products and food supplies are already tainted (due to TPP, GATT, NAFTA, etc)?

Our health is getting harmed by a tainted environment, poisoned food, and faulty products, right?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/business/food-fraud-more-widespread-than-suspected.html

Are any of The Preppers discussing this? It seems to me that most of the gear and food they purchase today on the open market is already tainted and faulty. Shouldn't the Preppers be 100% growing their own food, and 100% building their own devices, in order for their "escape kits" to be certified as "safe and reliable" and not tainted? Doesn't their families' lives depend on it?

What mutual funds and stocks do Preppers (and environmentalists) purchase and hold in their 401K plans? Ones that profit each time our "health will be harmed by a tainted environment, poisoned food, [or] faulty products"? Millions of people have 401K plans that are tainted and poisoned.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Nov 7, 2013 8:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

"Are any of The Preppers discussing this?"

No. We've got it figured out.

"It seems to me that most of the gear and food they purchase today on the open market is already tainted and faulty."

Nope. Field tested.

"Shouldn't the Preppers be 100% growing their own food, and 100% building their own devices, in order for their "escape kits" to be certified as "safe and reliable" and not tainted? Doesn't their families' lives depend on it?

Nope. Mrs. Mando and I are happy growing about 75% of our food. I'll call the rest the "Apocalypse Diet"

Don't need to build the devices I already have. With spares. Besides, Mrs. Mando and I are going to weather the storm on station - to borrow Navy termnology. That's why the bunker is more than a three day walk (5 by conservative estimate) from the closest urban population concentration. By the time anyone gets out of an urban concentration zone and to our place, they will likely be suffering from hydration issues and be an exquisitely soft target. Those that are smart enough to prepare and have water purification kits are more likely to be of a similar mind set and should be viewed as an asset. Through the crosshairs of an EOTECH 557 NV Holographic Sight set on an AR frame. With back-up iron sights in event of a battery failure - good to 1700 meters (not that I can see that far).

Barrett MRAD (.338 Lapua with BORS Leupold 50mm non illuminated scope) when the need to reach out and touch someone arises.

"What mutual funds and stocks do Preppers (and environmentalists) purchase and hold in their 401K plans?"

Haven't owned a mutual fund since 2002. The stocks I own in my portfolio are boring. But I sell covered calls against the inventory just about every month, in front of an expected downward move in price that is confirmed by technical indicators. As the value of the calls drops with the dropping stock price, I buy them back to close the position and pocket the difference. If I'm feeling bold, I'll buy in the money puts with the money from the sale of the covered calls and make twice the money on a single price move. Sometimes I like to make the market maker jump out of a 74 story window by selling calls naked and buying puts. Selling naked is even more fun because you don't have to own the underlying stock to do so. At the end of the downward price move, I buy back the calls to close the position and sell the puts.

Other than that, I trade the snot out of any stock that moves more than $4 in a week. In for about three period moving averages depending on what chart I used to make the entry decision.

"Ones that profit each time our "health will be harmed by a tainted environment, poisoned food, [or] faulty products"? Millions of people have 401K plans that are tainted and poisoned."

Like the misguided principled person who thinks the market should be "fair", I long ago abandoned the notion of it being anything other than a battle zone. Bad shit happens all the time. If a hurricane heads into the Gulf of Mexico, you can expect oil stocks to spike in front of the hurricane hitting. Knowing that, and making a profitable trade on such an event isn't necessarily a bad thing. The concept that some people will take the moral high ground and not trade "sin stocks" or trade stocks that move with events generally considered "bad" is unfathomable. Don't get me wrong, I honestly believe that at some point in our lives we are going to have to answer for what we do with fortune made on bad events - but to ignore the known market impact just means that "principled" traders aren't very smart. Case in point....years ago Mrs. Mando entered a trade on an oil stock that had a historical upward movement into their quarterly earnings announcement. Said earnings report was preceeded by a small storm named Katrina. Mrs. Mando's $4000 option purchase returned over $16,800. There was more than a little blood on that trade. We kept enough for taxes and commissions and sent the rest to one of the Katrina Recovery funds. I sleep well at night (and sometimes during the day).

I know, more than you asked for.......

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Monte B Cowboy Date: Nov 7, 2013 11:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

soundman's Prepper story... (one of the Many)
http://archive.org/post/318530/quote-of-the-day

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Nov 6, 2013 9:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Yep.

But as a long time employee in the pharmaceutical/insurance world who has recently been tasked with several projects surrounding the ACA, I have to say that the more screwed up this becomes, the more job security I have.


GO WASHINGTON!!!!
(yes, I think they are all self-serving mouth breathers)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Monte B Cowboy Date: Nov 6, 2013 3:03pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Have you noticed how generic prices are all over the place these days? WtF, generics? You could have said, "Go CVS!"

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/11/think-generic-means-cheap-think-again.html

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Nov 7, 2013 4:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Yep. Alot of folks don't realize the cost disparity of all drugs from one drug store to another. If you've got an HSA or a plan where you pay a percentage of the cost instead of a flat co-pay, it is imperitive that you shop around before you buy, just like you would with a car. The cost differences are present for both name brand as well as generics. And as the cost of generics continue to rise (as they will, especially as generic vesions of the newer drugs, like biologics, hit the market) it will be even more important to "shop before you buy".

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Nov 6, 2013 11:29am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

All I can say is that I am heartened to see another USNA educated sort putting it all to good use...

The unexamined life ain't worth living, n'est-ce pas?

[Not to stir up our former French forumite, er, French former forumite...ah, what would BD say?

;)

...] (almost forgot that "close"...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 6, 2013 1:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

That's a lot of words after your first sentence, AR. At a gut level I think you know it isn't right, no matter who the President is. It's not FDR's Social Security or LBJ's Medicare or Bush's Prescription Plan.

I would think advocates for the AHA would want to try and depoliticize the policy as much as possible, if for nothing else then to make it easier to mainstream the program.

E- Oh, why did you edit! I'm not sure how how or where to respond now, but I do get that your not happy with my above post. Anyways, a try.

I can't speak to the minutiae of where the political football is today or what words have been through the Frank Luntz-o-meter and what they are supposed to mean on a meta-level. I don't want to see any President's name as such displayed. The AHA is policy now and has passed its Constitutional muster, it is no longer a political campaign. It's kinda weird to see it as such.

This post was modified by micah6vs8 on 2013-11-06 09:25:26

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Nov 6, 2013 2:30am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Of course. Press the button and out come the words :-)

Hmmm, I didn't see your above post until now (if you mean the response to my unedited version that I edited to clarify, etc.) I just wanted it clear that I didn't love it but didn't see it as propaganda, blah blah.

Depoliticize the issue? Yeah, well, I think the Dems try, which doesn't work in the current environment, which is why they're the Party of Eternal Lameness. Or maybe they're just bad at politicizing it. Or both.

I don't know how I'd have felt if I was physically in the office, suddenly seeing the sign, vs. reading about it here. Sudden surprise vs. context. Probably wouldn't have liked it.

On the other hand, you did just give me a new idea. Maybe they're branding govt bills now. Like the "Nokia Theater" or the "Chick Fil A Bowl" and so on. Certainly Obama has paid for it, in a stress-and-trouble-and-gray-hair sense. Not sure how much he really did otherwise. (He does seem to lead from behind. Sheridan wouldn't have appreciated him much.) But you know, they could just sell the acts outright ... pay off the national debt ... even fund "Obamacare" ...





Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 6, 2013 3:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

>suddenly seeing the sign

The new Community Health Center building (which provides many needed services for our community) has an extra large lobby. We counted eight of the large signs and twelve smaller ones at each individual receptionists area. It was... noticeable.

They are smartly placed, as you can see with the one pic in my initial post (you can also see a bit of the other similar larger sign they had). ;-)

Here is the smaller sign (bad shot)

Attachment: small_prop.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dudley Dead Date: Nov 5, 2013 8:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

I am always uncomfortable with "cults of personality" with anyone, and it seems the current office holder has more than a little of this .I have friends who have been antiauthoritarian their whole life, but the buy in now, hook, line , and sinker . This is not new (Reagan) but with the avalanche social media , etc., It seems like you can't get away from politics, propaganda (from all sides), and The O man .
However one feels about the "AHA", it should not officially be called "Obamacare" . My 2 cents .

The maze is cool .
Subsidize more mazes .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 6, 2013 2:43am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

btw - I'm about a third of the way into 'The Court of the Red Tsar'. While some of the insight into his life before Nadezhda's death is eye opening (he locking himself in the bathroom as she hectored him outside the locked door, the collegiate atmosphere of the Kremlin and the importance of his raw chariasma- which is often overlooked by those who travel in his wake), I find Montefiore's writing to be disorganized (especially his time line) and difficult to follow. I know that the Holodomor isn't the focus of the book, but it is central to why Nadezhda committed suicide, and it wasn't really explained. I'm going to stick with it though and I am glad I'm reading it b/c it's making me think of him in a different light. Thanks for the rec.

So, I'm about to start the post -Nadezhda years...

E- that would be charisma, not chariasma (still not getting glasses, yet)

This post was modified by micah6vs8 on 2013-11-06 10:43:26

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dudley Dead Date: Nov 5, 2013 9:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

Yes, there is so much not covered . No one book could . But you are getting exactly what is special about the book, the ability to show different sides of this fascinating, if evil, figure , and his interaction with his "court" , and how it changes as time went on .
It is almost mind-blowing how chummy they all were in the beginning . People taking liberties with him, that not too long in the future would be very dangerous .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Nov 5, 2013 11:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

I agree it should not be "officially" designated Obamacare, but that was used by the opposition to the Affordable Health Care Act (aka Romneycare and an idea originally initiated by that ultra-left wing institution the Heritage Foundation) as a way to connect it to the President and discredit it - not without a patina of birther, racist conspiracy. So, I’m not sure this is a Corey Glover tune. More like co-opting the message and taking credit, or the full brunt of the blame, for the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xxgRUyzgs0

Dalia Lama = Lennon = Lenin = Gandhi = Stalin?
feeling old yet?
http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/11/living_colour_interview_guitar.html



This post was modified by bluedevil on 2013-11-06 07:35:56

This post was modified by bluedevil on 2013-11-06 07:37:11

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ColdRain108 Date: Dec 30, 2013 9:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Propaganda?

21:25:38

This post was modified by Little Sense on 2013-12-31 05:43:54